73 , top year in prog?

Hi guys!!

we all agree that 73 is a banner year for prog , but I always felt that it was the beginning of the end for it also!

I have been reading Paul Stump's book on Gentle Giant called Acquiring The Taste , and he makes an analysis of this year and its context and I cannot agree more with his comments especially on the last few sentences. I took the excerpts of the book for you to read!

Here goes!!!

This did not augur well. After all, 1973 was, by common critical
consent, Progressive rock's banner year, when the genre assumed
an almost omnipotent status in popular music. It was no longer
the music of the future, but, seemingly, the music of present and
future. Only its proletarian cousin, heavy rock, with which it some-
what sniffily shared social and cultural antecedents, could claim a
comparably high public profile as the authentic form of rock musi-
cal expression at that moment in time.

Emerson Lake and Palmer were, by 1973, arguably the biggest
band on the planet, rivalled in ticket and LP sales only by com-
patriots Led Zeppelin; Pink Floyd were preparing to release Dark
Side of the Moon; Yes were at their creative peak, as were Robert
Fripp'S dynamically re-configured King Crimson. The latter tWO
bands would release Ciose to the Edge and Larks' Tongues in Aspic,
possibly two of the most distinctive and innovative LPs in rock his-
tory, within five months of one another. Peter Gabriel was turning
Genesis from a cult into a mainstream phenomenon, and rapidly
assuming the kind of visibility associated with Bryan Ferry and
David Bowie. So fertile was the soil in which Progressive rock's
seedlings fell that Focus, the brilliantly mercurial Dutch act, who
combined slapstick pastiche, baroque rigour and hair-raising
improvisational virtuosity, became the hottest act of the year in
the UK and even broached the Top Ten singles chart.

But this state of affairs can be analysed otherwise. Rather than
representing a new beginning for Progressive rock and a corona-
tion, 1973 was rather a confirmation of the beginning of its inevi-
table decline and fall. Why?

Part of the reason was the feeding frenzy which followed the
explosion of rock music in the late 1960s, which led to a huge
surplus of vaguely Progressive-leaning talent. As Vertigo's very
existence attested, a whole new swathe of record labels had to be
created to cope with the tide of what was hoped to be creativity.
Fashion, naivety and simple economics cut the newcomers down
like wheat before the sickle; countless bands signed deals, recorded
tWO albums, smoked and shagged and starved their early twenties
away in west London squats -and then broke up. Rows, lassitude,
adultery, bad trips, bad luck, lack of interest, marriage, the infes-
tation of conmen, impounded Transit vans, malnutrition, scurvy,
STD or simple exhaustion of inadequate talent all swept bands
away. The simple vagaries of the market did for the rest, save for
a hard core who, either through luck, judgement, good manage-
ment, self-belief, quality of musicianship and composition, sheer
bloody-mindedness, or oiling up to journalists and broadcasters,
survived.

By 1972 the pattern was established; musical distinctiveness;
clever marketing; an ability to walk through walls in pursuit of
their music; LP records of well-judged material; and the ability to
withstand the banality of rock life in America all ensured a band's
ascension into the pantheon. ELP, Yes, Jethro Tull, Pink Floyd and
latterly Genesis had overcome the obstacles. It is no surprise that
they alone survived to carry the banner of early Progressive rock
idealism high into the cold artistic winter of the mid- and late-
70s. A handful of others survived at a less exalted, debt-haunted
halfway-house of success -Curved Air, Caravan, Barclay James
Harvest for example.

By 1973 other, newer acts were beginning to flood the lower
end of the market once again; Camel, Greenslade, Renaissance,
Back Door made it half-way up the career ladder by 1976, and are
preserved in the minds of Progressive apologists and completists
with a rosier conception of 'classic' status than is maybe strictly
necessary.

Pretty neat judgment as far as I am concerned!!

I could've never written this myself , but seeing it written out in a book , makes me sometimes angry I have not that writing skill, although I think I am practising it through the PA!

It's a fair point actually- reminds me of a saying- 'it was the best of times, it was the worst of times'. Certainly bands were peaking in this era- ELP, Genesis, Pink Floyd, to name but three- and the genre was at its biggest. Even non progressive rock artists like Elton John, Black Sabbath and Stevie Wonder were starting to use some of the attributes of prog rock in their work.

However, it could be argued that around this time, the excesses start to set in, which either you'll love (I definitely do!) or hate. Certainly, there were albums like 'A Passion Play' (which I don't understand at all) and 'Tales From Topographic Oceans' in this era that would become much derided, as they are very inaccessible and arguably, impenetrable. Perhaps this is even realised by the bands themselves, whose next albums ('War Child' and 'Relayer' respectively) were labelled 'back to basics' efforts, after the slightly unwieldy excesses of the last few.

This was also the era of double,triple and even QUADRUPLE(Chicago) live albums that were doubtless VERY expensive, and would have probably annoyed the average record buyer for their indulgence and very long epic songs.

After this, there wasn't much left to do in the genre, and some would even say it crossed over into folly (Wakeman's King Arthur on ice, Gabriel's slipperman costumes, ELP with orchestra), not me you understand- I think it's all great fun- where bigger was deemed to be better.

Indeed, there were some downright BAD albums, and for me THE very worst album to be attributed under prog is Todd Rundgren's 'Initiation' with its 37 minute epic 'A Treatise On Cosmic Fire' with mindless synth twiddling and no songwriting whatsoever.

Good points you make Salmacis!!

But As Stump says the 73 petroleum crisis played a major role also> Vinyls (petrol derivate products) became lighter (almost flexible) and not as well pressed either - since there was less matter , the groove had to be shallower allowing for easier skips and warpping of the disc.

Since the costs of transport (and therefore the weight and space factor) became more expensive , there was a lot less gatefold covers> This also pushed some Record labels to fold or rationalize: dawn and Neon folded, Vertigo and Harvest changed a bit, Deram became more conservative etc...

take a look at how many early 70's British groups that started in 69 or 70 actually stopped (or at least recorded their last album) in 73.

As Stump says , a newer generation set in such as Camel etc..  and if Virgin was succesfully created that year , it is because they struck platinum with Tubular bells as their very first release. If not for that fluke (TB was a surprise mega-hit but nothing to predict it either), they probably would've never developped into the meganational record kinglabel they are today and maybe folded twu years later! (I am extrapolating a bit here)

I am not saying that it all came crumbling down after the oil crisis , but it was the beginning of the slow end. (RIO excepted )

Look at the first wave of experimental Krautrock (Kraftwerk and Neu! excepted) all of their best albums are pre-73.

France was a couple of years behind in terms of prog explosion so Magma and Gong were about to explode of creativity. Ditto for Italy> but by the time the Franco regime disappeared from Spain in 75-76 , the artistic momentum had gone.

in the US,  Stadium-rock had started leaving few new adventurous groups  to succeed - except for Kansas , but they were riding the Yes wave.

By 1973 other, newer acts were beginning to flood the lower
end of the market once again; Camel, Greenslade, Renaissance,
Back Door made it half-way up the career ladder by 1976, and are
preserved in the minds of Progressive apologists and completists
with a rosier conception of 'classic' status than is maybe strictly
necessary.

How did Back Door (and the year 1976) get pulled in here?? I think I see a writer's trick here - doing a name check on a favourite band, when probably out of context (especially when musically BD were blues/jazz/rock, at the outer fringes of prog and some distance from other bands named here), hoping nobody will notice. In fact the classic Back Door albums were released in 1973: the eponymous first and Back Street Nites - coincidently the only ones to be issued on CD but that as late as 2003. But I believe the band was falling apart by 1976  - Fender bass master & innovator Colin Hodgkinson eventually being employed by Jan Hammer for his (oddly) vocal skills on Black Sheep in 1978, and then his bass playing on the 1979 follow-up Hammer (both have just been issued, remastered by Hammer himself, on Wounded Bird Records).

Dick Heath wrote: How did Back Door (and the year 1976) get pulled in here?? I think I see a writer's trick here - doing a name check on a favourite band, when probably out of context (especially when musically BD were blues/jazz/rock, at the outer fringes of prog and some distance from other bands named here), hoping nobody will notice. In fact the classic Back Door albums were released in 1973: the eponymous first and Back Street Nites - coincidently the only ones to be issued on CD but that as late as 2003. But I believe the band was falling apart by 1976  - Fender bass master & innovator Colin Hodgkinson eventually being employed by Jan Hammer for his (oddly) vocal skills on Black Sheep in 1978, and then his bass playing on the 1979 follow-up Hammer (both have just been issued, remastered by Hammer himself, on Wounded Bird Records).

I did not even know of Back Door and I must say I never saw them listed in prog lists before .... I'lll check at my library.....

I agree that Paul Stump pulls some stunts(..MMhh..... too easy!!) in his books and I thought that his The Music's All That Matters book , he was sometimes pretty reductive and using shortcuts when it suits him.

Even in this book , he is a little too much partisan (well I got so far as TP&TG album) about some albums. But this last paragraph is however really true! Most ultra progheads will refuse to admit that things do change from 73 onwards , and the championning of later bands (such as Camel) is overdone. Not one of their albums come to knee level of KC or Genesis's classic albums.

But I use his book to rewrite my GG reviews (I do not afree with his musical choices) as those are the last of the important group reviews (with Yes) I still have to re-write. But I choose to speak of the context of the albums within the band's history rather than the music itself , although of course I do talk about it!  

Sean Trane wrote: I am not saying that it all came crumbling down after the oil crisis , but it was the beginning of the slow end. (RIO excepted )

How does the oil crisis concern to progressive rock?

1973, the greatest year in music ever!